This invention generally pertains to systems and methods for collapsible storage and transport containers. More specifically, it pertains to a collapsible support frame that may be integrated into a container design or that may be added to an existing container in order to increase the strength of the container. For instance, the invention is useful to incorporate into a soft-sided golf travel bag to provide adequate protection for the clubs while maintaining a form that is not unnecessarily heavy and that is useful as a container while in a collapsed configuration.
The use of containers to protect items while in storage or in transit is well known. Typically, the container includes a surface that defines a volume within which items may be disposed. For example, a cardboard box may have sides, a bottom, and a top that define a cube-shaped inner volume in which items may be disposed and protected by the cardboard forming the sides, bottom, and top. Such a box is useful for storing or shipping items while affording some level of protection to the items. See, e.g., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0279816 and U.S. Pat. No. 8,857,702. Another familiar example is a suitcase. A suitcase may have surfaces comprising fabric or plastic that define an inner volume in which items may be disposed and protected by the fabric or plastic outer surface. Such a suitcase is useful for storing or shipping items while affording some level of protection to the items. See, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 2,475,961 and U.S. Pat. No. 7,392,888.
Prior-art containers generally suffer from one or two main failings. First, a container may not provide adequate protection for the items if constructed of light-weight or flexible materials, such as cardboard, plastic, or fabric. And if the container is constructed of heavier materials, such as wood or metal, to provide more robust protection for items disposed within it, the container may become so heavy as to be unsuitable for convenient storage or transport. Second, a fully or partially unused container may occupy valuable storage or transport space without serving any useful purpose. And if the container is constructed to be reconfigurable to occupy less volume when not in use, for example through folding, dismantling, or collapsing, it may require materials or a design that results in inadequate protection for the items. Or the reconfigurable container may require a design that is unsuitable for convenient storage or transport because of the complexity of the reconfiguration. And a reconfigurable container, even if it occupies less space when reconfigured, may be of no use as a container when reconfigured, such that the space that is occupied by the reconfigured container is still wholly wasted space.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,333,731 (“McCuaig”) discloses a hard-sided container. Such a container serves the purpose of protecting the items disposed within the container, golf clubs in this example. But this style of container suffers a number of failings. For instance, containers of this type are heavier than is convenient. And because the container does not collapse, it requires excess space for storage when not in use and does not efficiently use space when not filled to capacity.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0026281 (“Boardman”) discloses a hard-sided container that can be disassembled into three stackable sections when the container is not in use. But although the container occupies less space in the disassembled/stacked configuration than it does in assembled configuration, it is useless as a container when disassembled. As such, the space occupied by the disassembled/stacked Boardman container is wholly wasted. And the space occupied by the assembled/stacked container is the same regardless of whether the container is filled to capacity.
U.S. Pat. No. 7,219,902 (“Herold”) discloses a container having a soft-sided enclosure mounted to a rigid base where the enclosure may be collapsed into the rigid base when the container is not in use. But although the container may be lighter than a comparable hard-sided container, the protection that the soft-sided enclosure provides to the items disposed within the container is less than a comparable hard-sided container—the container may be insufficient to adequately protect the items. And while the container occupies less space when the soft-sided enclosure is pushed down into the base, it is useless as a container when so configured. As such, the space occupied by the collapsed Herold container is wholly wasted. Further, the space occupied by the extended container is the roughly the same regardless of whether the container is filled to capacity.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0185999 (“Keays”) discloses a container comprising a flexible cover disposed over and attached to a collapsible skeleton. The Keays skeleton is comprised of a series of sets of “ribs” and “pivot arms.” Each set of ribs and pivot arms define a circumference, and the rib/pivot-arm sets are connected to each other through longitudinally extending tubes. The tubes may be telescoping or offset, such that the tubes may be fully extended to define a long, full-capacity container, or fully collapsed to reduce the space of the container when the container is not in use. And each rib is pivotally connected to a pair of pivot arms such that the pivot arms can pivot to open the skeleton, and thereby define the opening into the container. But the Keays container suffers a number of defects. For example, the longitudinal support of the fully extended skeleton is provided by only a subset of the tubes, resulting in a container that is longitudinally weaker than it would be otherwise and prone to asymmetric collapsing. And because the container is accessed by pivoting open the skeleton, the container as configured for access (i.e., open) occupies a different space than the container as configured to hold items (i.e., closed). This means that the container may have to be repositioned to allow access. And the Keays container lacks utility when collapsed, meaning that the space occupied by the collapsed container is wholly wasted. Further, the space occupied by the extended container is the same regardless of whether the container is filled to capacity.
Other collapsible containers suffer similar deficiencies. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 4,036,361 (“Jacobson”) discloses a container comprising a flexible cover disposed within and attached to a collapsible frame. But the Jacobson frame components that control the collapse of the container (the “legs”) operate independently, making the container cumbersome in practice. And U.S. Pat. No. 7,708,160 (“Booth”) discloses a container comprising rigid side members, some of which may be folded to change the volume of the container. But the Booth frame components that control the collapse of the container (the “side members”) operate independently and collapse to restrict access to the container, making the container cumbersome in practice.
Accordingly, there is a need for a light-weight configurable container-support frame that can be integrated with a surface (e.g., fabric) to create a configurable container that can be easily resized to contain different volumes and still provide adequate protection for the articles disposed within the container. There is also a need for a light-weight configurable container-support frame that can be easily configured to be disposed within pre-existing containers of different sizes and thereby improve the protection afforded by such containers to the items disposed within.